Transcript of Meeting of Comrade Stalin with Harry Pollitt, 5 January 1951

Transcript of the Meeting of Comrade Stalin with Harry Pollitt

5th January 1951

Present: Comrades V.M. Molotov and Pavlov (Interpreter).

Comrade Stalin
said that the document (Draft of the Programme of the Communist Party of England) has come up well.

Pollitt
answered that it is the final draft and was prepared in accordance with the September letter of Comrade Stalin.

Comrade Stalin
said
that he has made some amendments to the draft and he wanted to know the opinion of Pollitt about these amendments. He, Comrade Stalin, brought to attention the fact that the draft talks about equality of nations that enter the Commonwealth of Nations. In the press or in public speeches one may talk about equality of nations. However, this is not scientific. It will be more appropriate to talk about the equal rights of nations and not of the equality of nations. One nation cannot be equal to the other in the same way as one man cannot be equal to the other. For example, irrespective of what concessions the Malayan nation may get from the English government, the Malayan nation shall not immediately become equal to the English nation as the cultural level of the English nation is higher than that of the Malayan nation. Besides, the English nation commands incomparably more significant quantity of prepared cadre than the Malayans. Consequently, we may talk about providing to the nations not equality but equal rights which one nation may use better than the other. He, Comrade Stalin, would like to know whether Comrade

Pollitt
agrees with it.

Pollitt
answers that he fully agrees with this amendment.

Comrade Stalin
says
that in the Programme the question of nationalisation is not put forward clearly. Basing on what is stated on this count one may conclude that the entire landed property shall be nationalised. We, says Comrade Stalin, think that the landed property of the small landholders in agricultural regions should not be nationalised. If Comrade Pollitt wants to establish a coalition with the working class, working intelligentsia, lower and middle strata in the cities and small property holders in the villages then one has to deny nationalisation of small landed property. In this there is nothing dangerous. In the countries of People’s Democracies, for example, small landholdings have not been nationalised.

Comrade Stalin
further
continues that he wanted to propose an amendment regarding the question of compensation to the owners of the property which would be nationalised. The draft of the Programme does not visualise any compensation with the exception of compensation for those property holders who are found to be in a difficult material condition. He, Comrade Stalin, thinks it is necessary to think about such partial compensation for those property holders who shall have loyal relationship with the people’s government but denying compensation to those owners of nationalised property who shall resist the people’s government.

Comrade Stalin
jokingly commented that just as Comrade Pollitt may notice, Comrade Stalin criticises the draft of the Programme from the rightist position.

Pollitt
laughed and said that the criticism of the draft made by Comrade Stalin is fully justified as here and there we have certainly introduced elements of Leftism in the draft.

Comrade Stalin
reads out that the section from the part titled ‘

People’s Democracy – The Way to
Socialism’
in which it is said that, as experience has shown, it is possible to march towards socialism through the path of People’s Democracy just as it is being done in the countries of People’s Democracy in Western Europe and in the People’s Republic of China.

Comrade Stalin
says
that this statement is not precise as the People’s Republic of China has not yet reached the stage of People’s Democracy. In China the national bourgeoisie yet remains untouched; nationalisation has encompassed only the property of the Japanese. The Chinese think it to be correct that for the present they have not touched the national bourgeoisie. Consequently, if the draft wants to cite the People’s Republic of China then there shall be no harmony as the draft foresees the nationalisation of the big private property of the English bourgeoisie.

Pollitt
answers that he understands the erroneousness of mentioning the example of People’s Republic of China.

Comrade Stalin
says
that it would have been proper to forewarn the English people in the Programme that the capitalists shall not voluntarily give up their property and their disproportionate profits for the benefit of the English people. It would be more proper to propose that they shall actively resist the decisions of the people’s Parliament and shall fight with all means for the preservation of their privileges including the use of force. This is why the English people and the people’s government should be ready in self-defence to give a befitting reply to such attempts. This should be said in the Programme.

Pollitt
answered that he agrees with this.

Comrade Stalin
said that in the section titled ‘

Socialist Nationalisation’
where it is said that small shopkeepers and managers shall be freed from the limitations imposed by the monopolists, he suggested that after the word, ‘small shopkeepers and managers’, words ‘and also the small property holders in agricultural regions’ be added.

Comrade Stalin added that in the section titled ‘

Social

Service’
where equal pay for work to men and women is discussed, the words ‘for equal labour’ should be added.

Comrade Stalin
continues,
that at the end of the draft of the Programme where the establishment of a free and happy Socialist Britain is mentioned, he would remove the words ‘and for the liberation of mankind’ and proposed that the sentence should end with the following words, ‘establishment of a free and happy, strong and powerful socialist Great Britain’. Recalling in the draft only about Britain may create a feeling that the CP of England renounces the dominions and other English ownerships.

Pollitt
said, that as Great Britain includes only England, Wales and Scotland, it would be better to mention about the establishment of free and happy, strong and powerful Socialist Britain and Commonwealth of Nations. In so far as the words ‘liberation of mankind’ is concerned, these are rhetorical and these should in fact be excluded.

Comrade Stalin
says, he agrees that the word ‘Great Britain’ should be changed by the words ‘Britain and Commonwealth of Nations’.

Comrade Stalin says, that in the section titled ‘

National Independence of the English People and of all the Peoples of British Empire’ where
it says that, ‘All Relationships Between the Peoples of Contemporary Empire that are based on political, economic and military domination should come to an end and be transformed into new relationships based on complete national independence and equality. This requires the recall of all military forces and of English administrative personnel from the territories of the colonial and dependent countries, handing over of sovereignty to governments freely elected by the people and return of the wealth and of the natural resources to the people of these countries that have been appropriated by industries, traders and by monopoly banks’. He, Comrade Stalin, would have excluded the words, ‘and return to the people of these countries their wealth and natural resources that were these were appropriated by industries, traders and bank monopolies’. In the present formulation a very complex question has been raised. It is hardly possible to have a complete solution of this problem if only for the reason that it is impossible, for example, to return to the people of the colonial and dependent countries those resources that have already been consumed by the metropolis. Certainly if the pocket of Comrade Pollitt be full of money, then he may compensate the countries exploited by British imperialism. However, he, Comrade Stalin, has his doubts on this count.

Pollitt
answers that Comrade Stalin is perfectly right. Certainly, the people’s government shall not have sufficient resources for the satisfaction of the task suggested in the Programme. He, Pollitt, thinks the suggestion of Comrade Stalin to have the concerned formulation mentioned above to be removed from the Programme to be correct. He, Pollitt, would like to know the opinion of Comrade Stalin as to whether the formulation regarding the return of the English administrative personnel from the territories of colonial and dependent countries as discussed in the passage discussed earlier. The fact is that the governments, to whom the sovereignty over these territories shall be handed over, shall ask the people’s government for help by English cadre.

Comrade Stalin
said
that he has doubts whether it is worthwhile to discuss at this moment the return of English administrative personnel. It is possible that the Americans may want the return of the English administrative personnel recalled by the people’s government to put in these territories under discussion their own administrative personnel. This is why he, Comrade Stalin, thinks that may be it is better to talk about the return of the English bureaucratic apparatus. However, he agrees with Comrade Pollitt that one should not at all talk about the return of the English administrative personnel and exclude the words ‘and English administrative personnel’.

Pollitt
asks how Comrade Stalin evaluates the draft of the Programme as a whole.

Comrade Stalin
answers
that the draft has been well prepared and says that the appearance of the Programme of the Communist Party of England occupies a turning point in the history of the working class movement of the Anglo-Saxon countries. This Programme in its essence is a suitable document for the Communist Parties of USA, Canada, Australia and other Anglo-Saxon countries. The Communist Party of the USA at the moment is in a hard situation; they have a lot of confusion. One should, however, recognise, says Comrade Stalin, that however much the Americans may take pride in their democracy, in monarchist England there is more freedom than in the USA.

Pollitt
says that he is in full agreement with it.

Comrade Stalin
asks when the Programme is expected to be passed and published.

Pollitt
answers that the Plenum of the Executive Committee is fixed for 13thof January where the Programme must be discussed and approved. Thus the Programme would be published by the end of January.

Comrade Stalin
says
that the Programme should be published in as large numbers as possible and be sent to the USA, Canada, Australia and to other Anglo-Saxon countries. If help is required for the publication of the Programme then we, says Comrade Stalin, shall help.

Pollitt
says that he has taken on himself the responsibility to send the draft of the Programme to Tim Buck in Canada.

Comrade Stalin
said
that he has put before Pollitt the main amendments to the draft. There are other less significant amendments. All these have been put in the text of the draft and shall be translated in English and tomorrow morning these will be delivered to Pollitt.

Pollitt
thanks Comrade Stalin
for the help.

Comrade Stalin
answers: ‘This is our duty’.

Recorded by V. Pavlov.

RGASPI, Fond 558, Opis 11, Delo 289, Listy 1-9.